You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Israel-Palestine-Jordan
Debka so salt: Israel names price to delay attack until Spring (after election)
2012-08-19
Handled by National Security Adviser Tom Donilon for the US president and senior adviser Ron Dermer for the prime minister, they focus essentially on a four-point plan embodying Israel's requirements for delaying an attack.

1. President Obama will formally inform the two houses of congress in writing that he plans to use military force to prevent Iran from arming itself with a nuclear weapon. He will request their endorsement. Aside from this step's powerful deterrent weight for persuading Iran's leaders to give up their pursuit of a nuclear bomb, it would also give the US president the freedom to go to war with Iran when he sees fit, without have to seek congressional endorsement.
The problem being that the our beloved president will never see fit to go to war with Iran.
2. To underscore his commitment, President Obama would pay a visit to Israel in the weeks leading up to election-day and deliver a speech to the Knesset solemnly pledging to use American military force against the Islamic Republic if Tehran still refuses to give up its nuclear weapon program. He will repeat that pledge before various other public forums.

3, In the coming months up until Spring 2013, the United States will upgrade Israel's military, intelligence and technological capabilities so that if President Obama (whether he is reelected or replaced by Mitt Romney) decides to back out of this commitment, Israel will by then be in command of the resources necessary for inflicting mortal damage on Iran's nuclear program with a unilateral strike.
debkafile's military sources note that an influx of these top-grade US military resources would bridge the gap between American and Israeli ticking clocks for an attack on Iran, and dispel the fear in Jerusalem that delay would give Iran time to bury its key facilities in "zones of immunity" - outside Israel's reach for serious damage with its present capabilities.
Sure. Jam yesterday and jam tomorrow, but never jam today.
4. If points 1-3 can be covered -- and Netanyahu and Barak are convinced the US really means to strike Iran next spring - our Washington and Jerusalem sources report that Jerusalem may be coming around to agreeing to hold back a lone Israeli attack this autumn.
One hopes this means the Israelis have information that Iran's nuclear work has again been slowed, but one suspects they are now pinning their plans on a Mitt Romney win in November.
Those sources report that President Obama has not rejected the plan.
Another way of saying he has not agreed to it....
Donilon was told to keep on talking to Netanyahu and Barak.
Posted by:Water Modem

#8  Israel has asked Egypt to withdraw its Armor, i.e. Main Battle Tanks + Mech/Infantry Fighting Vehicles, from the Sinai as these are in violation of the Sinai treaty.

The US = POTUS BAMMER may have a serious problem wid NOT-IRAN before October or espec the November elections iff Egypt refuses.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2012-08-19 21:41  

#7  I think it is more likely that Israel will reoccupy the Sinai and Gaza strip than attack Iran before the elections.

If Egypt has completely tossed out the peace treaty, Israel would be justified in reoccupation of those areas.
Posted by: crosspatch   2012-08-19 17:46  

#6  Because they aren't ready to go Spot.
See item#3.
Posted by: Skidmark   2012-08-19 16:00  

#5  Of course, any deal made with O would not be binding on Romney. So why would Israel make such a deal?
Posted by: Spot   2012-08-19 13:24  

#4  Evidence that this is BS found with the Tom Donilon lead, and the excerpt below:

1. President Obama will formally inform the two houses of congress in writing that he plans to use military force to prevent Iran from arming itself with a nuclear weapon.
Posted by: Besoeker   2012-08-19 11:23  

#3  The problem is, Obama is known for his weakness against Iran. Both Israel and Iran know this. If this is true, then some extra diplomatic pressure might be helpful, but everyone just might ignore it too.

Posted by: DarthVader   2012-08-19 10:53  

#2  I see the advantages to O & Co. But, given O's record of keeping his word, what are the advantages to Israel?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2012-08-19 09:10  

#1  Of course being a double dealer himself, the One would ponder "what if I agree to all this, and the [expletives] still attack before election day?". It's not like he's ever played Chicago politics to consider such an scenario.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2012-08-19 08:54  

00:00